Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
Left 'outers'
Who on the left is voting out?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Ric.ror. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
AOG
When I hear arguments that suggest that ITV are 'pro in',it makes me realise that I don't want to be aligned to the leave campaign.
It's just too simplistic.
The reasons for remaining or leaving are extremely complex and demand that we really analyse the full extent of the pros and cons.
I have.
I hope everyone else has done the same.
When I hear arguments that suggest that ITV are 'pro in',it makes me realise that I don't want to be aligned to the leave campaign.
It's just too simplistic.
The reasons for remaining or leaving are extremely complex and demand that we really analyse the full extent of the pros and cons.
I have.
I hope everyone else has done the same.
AOG
Your last post makes me sound bad.
I understand where you're coming from, but I will be honest here...if TTT or New Judge had put forward a rock solid argument for staying, I would hav taken the argument on board.
I find TTT and New Judge's political stance 'very wrong', but they have the intelligence to put forward an argument terms that I often find very persuasive.
Unfortunately, the main thrust of the pro-leave campaign has been left to others who are not that good and making their point on AB.
The 'Idiotaratti'.
Your last post makes me sound bad.
I understand where you're coming from, but I will be honest here...if TTT or New Judge had put forward a rock solid argument for staying, I would hav taken the argument on board.
I find TTT and New Judge's political stance 'very wrong', but they have the intelligence to put forward an argument terms that I often find very persuasive.
Unfortunately, the main thrust of the pro-leave campaign has been left to others who are not that good and making their point on AB.
The 'Idiotaratti'.
sp1814
/// My number one reason is economics. ///
/// I believe that it is in the best interests of medium and large businesses to have the clout of being in the largest trading bloc in the world to remain in the EU. ///
Oh so all you want is for medium and large businesses, to further line their pockets, by employing low skilled workers in from the EU, all at the expense of our own workers, who have to compete with workers from countries where their level of pay is a fraction of what the British worker once expected to be paid.
Blimey I am beginning to sound like a socialist, that is why I can't understand why Labour is all for staying in, I thought they were supposed to support the working man?
/// My number one reason is economics. ///
/// I believe that it is in the best interests of medium and large businesses to have the clout of being in the largest trading bloc in the world to remain in the EU. ///
Oh so all you want is for medium and large businesses, to further line their pockets, by employing low skilled workers in from the EU, all at the expense of our own workers, who have to compete with workers from countries where their level of pay is a fraction of what the British worker once expected to be paid.
Blimey I am beginning to sound like a socialist, that is why I can't understand why Labour is all for staying in, I thought they were supposed to support the working man?
You know what's really weird...why don't some from the leave campaign acknowledge that there may be a different point of view?
I can totally understand the other point of view and recognise that many people will vote with what they believe.
It's almost as if the leave campaign cannot understand another viewpoint.
Odd really.
I can totally understand the other point of view and recognise that many people will vote with what they believe.
It's almost as if the leave campaign cannot understand another viewpoint.
Odd really.
AOG
You make yourself sound simple with your last post.
Like a child.
I said my number one reason, not my only reason.
There are a number of reasons why I think we should stay in the EU. The primary one is economic stability.
Also in the top ten of my reasons is that all of the people of respect (in terms of intelligence) are voting to stay....a all of morons I know are voting to leave.
The moron thing is no where near the deciding factor - but when four morons all decide on one thing...it gives you pause for thought.
You make yourself sound simple with your last post.
Like a child.
I said my number one reason, not my only reason.
There are a number of reasons why I think we should stay in the EU. The primary one is economic stability.
Also in the top ten of my reasons is that all of the people of respect (in terms of intelligence) are voting to stay....a all of morons I know are voting to leave.
The moron thing is no where near the deciding factor - but when four morons all decide on one thing...it gives you pause for thought.
But to be honest - I'm totally the kind of person that both the 'remain' and 'leave' campaigns need to target.
Politically, I'm dead centre, with some of my ideals being conservative (occasionally with a lower case 'c' and sometimes with an upper case 'c') and some of them being 'left of centre'.
I'm the kind of person who is driven by facts and the analysis of those facts (which may be why I do the job I do).
It's not 'the Left' who need to be persuaded...but the 'floating Left'.
That's the key to whether we stay or go.
Perhaps if both sides put forward considered sets of analysis to back their arguments, it would be a easy.
As it is, I've had to spend weeks reading various websites to make a decision (coupled with what I've read on AB and in various newspaper sites).
To me - this is way more important than a GE, and demands that EVERYONE really gets to grips with the implications of in or out.
The whole farming subsidy thing had my eyes spinning for at least a week!
Politically, I'm dead centre, with some of my ideals being conservative (occasionally with a lower case 'c' and sometimes with an upper case 'c') and some of them being 'left of centre'.
I'm the kind of person who is driven by facts and the analysis of those facts (which may be why I do the job I do).
It's not 'the Left' who need to be persuaded...but the 'floating Left'.
That's the key to whether we stay or go.
Perhaps if both sides put forward considered sets of analysis to back their arguments, it would be a easy.
As it is, I've had to spend weeks reading various websites to make a decision (coupled with what I've read on AB and in various newspaper sites).
To me - this is way more important than a GE, and demands that EVERYONE really gets to grips with the implications of in or out.
The whole farming subsidy thing had my eyes spinning for at least a week!
SP.
Can I please ask you a question?
In your post at 12.16 you said “But then, I'm not exactly 'Left'...I'm 'at the right of Left' (as my posts about benefits will attest)”.
So, I went back to the thread where you and I locked horns about overseas aid,
http://
where you said “Get rid of all benefits, and let people fend for themselves”.
Now, many “outers” (myself included), site the influx of migrants into the UK, as one of the reasons for leaving. I think I can reasonably say that most of us feel that if we stay, then things can only get worse.
It would seem that the majority of these migrants are on some kind of benefits, whether it be the full on “here’s a house and here’s some money” or those that are working, but are able to claim in-work benefits.
So my question is if you are so anti - benefits, then how can you lean towards ‘stay’ when staying would most likely mean even more migrants, therefore even more benefits?
Can I please ask you a question?
In your post at 12.16 you said “But then, I'm not exactly 'Left'...I'm 'at the right of Left' (as my posts about benefits will attest)”.
So, I went back to the thread where you and I locked horns about overseas aid,
http://
where you said “Get rid of all benefits, and let people fend for themselves”.
Now, many “outers” (myself included), site the influx of migrants into the UK, as one of the reasons for leaving. I think I can reasonably say that most of us feel that if we stay, then things can only get worse.
It would seem that the majority of these migrants are on some kind of benefits, whether it be the full on “here’s a house and here’s some money” or those that are working, but are able to claim in-work benefits.
So my question is if you are so anti - benefits, then how can you lean towards ‘stay’ when staying would most likely mean even more migrants, therefore even more benefits?
“If you really need me to tell you, I will, but first, I need to know why you need to know.”
You’ve kindly answered the question, sp. But please indulge me a little further. I hope I’m not among the morons who you know will be voting to leave. I know I am persistent in my views but I try to be constructive, try to put my points across without resorting to insults and hope to make some interesting reading. Though I may sometimes not give the impression, I do respect other people’s views even though vehemently disagreeing with them. I also respect their right to vote the way they feel (in fact respect that above all else – see below). I often cannot understand the way some people vote, and that is particularly so with the referendum, but that is not the same and failing to respect their views.
Let me tell you my (main, but not sole) reasons for urging a “Leave” vote. There seems to be three main issues exercising people’s minds as I see it. In (my) ascending order of importance these are:
The Economy
Immigration
Democracy
Here’s my (very brief) views on each:
As far as the economy goes I believe there would be a short term shock in the event of Brexit. Businesses and markets don’t like uncertainty and Brexit will certainly bring a shedload of that. However, once things settle down I believe the UK’s business relationship with the remainder of the EU will be very little effected. Business depends on Europe – the individual nations. But it does not depend on the EU. The rest of the EU does a huge chunk of its business with the UK and the EU will not jeopardise that. Politicians are confusing the electorate by portraying dependence on Europe with dependence on the EU.
The immigration issue is unarguable. The situation with immigration from outside the EU will remain unchanged (though there is the danger that the EU will eventually include the UK in its migrant distribution plans, whatever “veto” we may have). But the situation with migration from the EU is not open to argument. Currently the UK has no control over who settles here from within the EU. Following a Brexit it will. There will still be migration from the EU. It simply means that we invite people whom we want and will not have to accept people like the Romanians currently sleeping in the underpasses beneath Marble Arch (and I’ve seen them – nice it ain’t). Once again politicians are confusing the electorate by suggesting such things that ex-pats living in Spain will be repatriated. They won’t. There is a UN “Agreement on Treaties” which says that individuals who have taken advantage of a particular treaty cannot be forced to relinquish that advantage in the event the treaty is rescinded. Not only that, the EU wouldn’t want to do it.
Lastly (and most importantly) democracy – the “democratic deficit”. Currently, depending on which report you read, up to 75% of UK legislation originates in Brussels. It is common ground that the figure is not less than 50%. This effects businesses and individuals. Only one business in twenty trades with the EU. The other nineteen have to abide by all the EU regulations even though they never interact with the EU at all. The electorate has no control over this. The MEPs are simply the EUs lip-service to democracy. They cannot introduce legislation. Only the (unelected) Commission can do that. So, imagine this; all the 700-odd MEPs think the Schengen Agreement is dangerous and must be ended. There’s nothing they can do. They cannot table a bill through the EU parliament. It is not within their powers. The Commission, in its arrogance, knows this and is somewhat proud of it. Furthermore, the UK has only 10% of the MEPs and is constantly outvoted in the EU Parliament (I’ve posted the figures before on AB). Couple this with the EU’s expansion plans (which includes as candidates Albania, Macedonia and Turkey). The lack of democracy will only get worse.
I’ve set out my stall. I could go on but I see 4,000 characters fast approaching.
You’ve kindly answered the question, sp. But please indulge me a little further. I hope I’m not among the morons who you know will be voting to leave. I know I am persistent in my views but I try to be constructive, try to put my points across without resorting to insults and hope to make some interesting reading. Though I may sometimes not give the impression, I do respect other people’s views even though vehemently disagreeing with them. I also respect their right to vote the way they feel (in fact respect that above all else – see below). I often cannot understand the way some people vote, and that is particularly so with the referendum, but that is not the same and failing to respect their views.
Let me tell you my (main, but not sole) reasons for urging a “Leave” vote. There seems to be three main issues exercising people’s minds as I see it. In (my) ascending order of importance these are:
The Economy
Immigration
Democracy
Here’s my (very brief) views on each:
As far as the economy goes I believe there would be a short term shock in the event of Brexit. Businesses and markets don’t like uncertainty and Brexit will certainly bring a shedload of that. However, once things settle down I believe the UK’s business relationship with the remainder of the EU will be very little effected. Business depends on Europe – the individual nations. But it does not depend on the EU. The rest of the EU does a huge chunk of its business with the UK and the EU will not jeopardise that. Politicians are confusing the electorate by portraying dependence on Europe with dependence on the EU.
The immigration issue is unarguable. The situation with immigration from outside the EU will remain unchanged (though there is the danger that the EU will eventually include the UK in its migrant distribution plans, whatever “veto” we may have). But the situation with migration from the EU is not open to argument. Currently the UK has no control over who settles here from within the EU. Following a Brexit it will. There will still be migration from the EU. It simply means that we invite people whom we want and will not have to accept people like the Romanians currently sleeping in the underpasses beneath Marble Arch (and I’ve seen them – nice it ain’t). Once again politicians are confusing the electorate by suggesting such things that ex-pats living in Spain will be repatriated. They won’t. There is a UN “Agreement on Treaties” which says that individuals who have taken advantage of a particular treaty cannot be forced to relinquish that advantage in the event the treaty is rescinded. Not only that, the EU wouldn’t want to do it.
Lastly (and most importantly) democracy – the “democratic deficit”. Currently, depending on which report you read, up to 75% of UK legislation originates in Brussels. It is common ground that the figure is not less than 50%. This effects businesses and individuals. Only one business in twenty trades with the EU. The other nineteen have to abide by all the EU regulations even though they never interact with the EU at all. The electorate has no control over this. The MEPs are simply the EUs lip-service to democracy. They cannot introduce legislation. Only the (unelected) Commission can do that. So, imagine this; all the 700-odd MEPs think the Schengen Agreement is dangerous and must be ended. There’s nothing they can do. They cannot table a bill through the EU parliament. It is not within their powers. The Commission, in its arrogance, knows this and is somewhat proud of it. Furthermore, the UK has only 10% of the MEPs and is constantly outvoted in the EU Parliament (I’ve posted the figures before on AB). Couple this with the EU’s expansion plans (which includes as candidates Albania, Macedonia and Turkey). The lack of democracy will only get worse.
I’ve set out my stall. I could go on but I see 4,000 characters fast approaching.
Norway are doing fine by not being in the EU.
http://
http://
I actually don't think this is a left and right issue to be honest.
I think most people will consider how Europe affects them directly in their own little bubble and whether it works for them or not.
Only extremes on both sides will just tie their sails to an in or out mast, but like most extremes, they're in the minority.
I think most people will consider how Europe affects them directly in their own little bubble and whether it works for them or not.
Only extremes on both sides will just tie their sails to an in or out mast, but like most extremes, they're in the minority.
Bigbad
Thank you for an interesting question.
You ask:
"So my question is if you are so anti - benefits, then how can you lean towards ‘stay’ when staying would most likely mean even more migrants, therefore even more benefits?"
The answer is simple - if we capped benefits for all UK citizens, which includes but is not limited to:
1. Limiting child benefit to the first child, and for a maximum of six years.
2. Tax relief for private medical insurance and pension provision.
3. All NHS treatment to be free at point of contact providing evidence of NI contributions is available.
Then what would be applicable to migrants would be the same as is applicable to established UK citizens.
We are absolutely free to set our own benefits caps. The bedroom tax proves that. By being more stringent on benefits, we become less attractive to migrants who don't want to pay into the system.
Basically (and this will sound horrible to many people) - I absolutely believe that being on benefits should be something to be ashamed of. When I was growing up, I remember the fear of being unemployed - simply because I would find it a social stigma.
For too many - it isn't.
That's why I am on 'the very right of the Left'.
Thank you for an interesting question.
You ask:
"So my question is if you are so anti - benefits, then how can you lean towards ‘stay’ when staying would most likely mean even more migrants, therefore even more benefits?"
The answer is simple - if we capped benefits for all UK citizens, which includes but is not limited to:
1. Limiting child benefit to the first child, and for a maximum of six years.
2. Tax relief for private medical insurance and pension provision.
3. All NHS treatment to be free at point of contact providing evidence of NI contributions is available.
Then what would be applicable to migrants would be the same as is applicable to established UK citizens.
We are absolutely free to set our own benefits caps. The bedroom tax proves that. By being more stringent on benefits, we become less attractive to migrants who don't want to pay into the system.
Basically (and this will sound horrible to many people) - I absolutely believe that being on benefits should be something to be ashamed of. When I was growing up, I remember the fear of being unemployed - simply because I would find it a social stigma.
For too many - it isn't.
That's why I am on 'the very right of the Left'.
Yes that's quite true, tony.
However, the UK would be foolish, in th eevent of "Brexit", to adopt the Norwegian model. Norway ia a member of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA). This was essentially designed as a "waiting room" for new EU members whilst they were awaiting full membership. The Norwegian government failed to persuade its electorate to vote to join the EU so they remain in the waiting room. Iceland is in a similar position, except that it was the government itself which withdrew their application.
Membership of EFTA brings with it one of the principle drawbacks of EU membership - the free movement of people. Additionally, EFTA's four members (the two I've mentioned plus Switzerland and Liechtenstein) are also signatories to the Schengen Agreement. The four members have thus relinquished their rights to control their borders in the mistaken belief that it is necessary in order to trade with the EU. The UK most certainly does not want to relinquish its EU membership only to be left as a sort of "associate member" with all the disadvantages that bestows.
Everybody seems to be asking "If we're not in the EU, what will be in?". That is is spurious question. If we're not in the EU it's quite simple - we're out of it.
However, the UK would be foolish, in th eevent of "Brexit", to adopt the Norwegian model. Norway ia a member of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA). This was essentially designed as a "waiting room" for new EU members whilst they were awaiting full membership. The Norwegian government failed to persuade its electorate to vote to join the EU so they remain in the waiting room. Iceland is in a similar position, except that it was the government itself which withdrew their application.
Membership of EFTA brings with it one of the principle drawbacks of EU membership - the free movement of people. Additionally, EFTA's four members (the two I've mentioned plus Switzerland and Liechtenstein) are also signatories to the Schengen Agreement. The four members have thus relinquished their rights to control their borders in the mistaken belief that it is necessary in order to trade with the EU. The UK most certainly does not want to relinquish its EU membership only to be left as a sort of "associate member" with all the disadvantages that bestows.
Everybody seems to be asking "If we're not in the EU, what will be in?". That is is spurious question. If we're not in the EU it's quite simple - we're out of it.
I'm surprised at you SP1814 for lumping all benefits into one. Do your feelings amount to the same for disability benefit for instance?
I know who you are aiming at and to be honest there are now 3rd generation benefit families who have never known anything other than how to make the most of that situation but I think you are being way too harsh to say all benefit claimants should be ashamed.
I never thought I'd see that from you.
I know who you are aiming at and to be honest there are now 3rd generation benefit families who have never known anything other than how to make the most of that situation but I think you are being way too harsh to say all benefit claimants should be ashamed.
I never thought I'd see that from you.
"Basically (and this will sound horrible to many people) - I absolutely believe that being on benefits should be something to be ashamed of. When I was growing up, I remember the fear of being unemployed - simply because I would find it a social stigma."
"That's why I am on 'the very right of the Left'. "
I faintly detect you are reluctant to admit (or accept) to being to the Right of Centre, sp. There's hope for you yet and I would describe you as being "on the very Left of the Right" :-)
"That's why I am on 'the very right of the Left'. "
I faintly detect you are reluctant to admit (or accept) to being to the Right of Centre, sp. There's hope for you yet and I would describe you as being "on the very Left of the Right" :-)
sp1814
Basically (and this will sound horrible to many people) - I absolutely believe that being on benefits should be something to be ashamed of.
sp1814
No.
Double it. We can afford it.
Get rid of state pensions, and remove the winter fuel allowance for ex-pats living in warm countries.
Job done.
18:43 Sun 03rd Apr 2016
sp on foriegn aid ^
Basically (and this will sound horrible to many people) - I absolutely believe that being on benefits should be something to be ashamed of.
sp1814
No.
Double it. We can afford it.
Get rid of state pensions, and remove the winter fuel allowance for ex-pats living in warm countries.
Job done.
18:43 Sun 03rd Apr 2016
sp on foriegn aid ^
Gosh, this is getting very serious and it is late at night for me. Thank you NJ for writing what I would have liked to have said.
Sp - I have been very 'middle of the road' in voting for 20 years now (I'm glad I didn't vote for Blair.) This is hugely important and cross-party. Don't just rely on the posts on here - have a look at a lot of other (often hidden) news. Economics actually come down on the side of Brexit - after a first shock. I do wish I were cleverer at pasting stuff. Honestly it's not all economics, it's a deeper feeling and understanding that we are US - and we don't want to be told what to do. We want to be free again - as we(successfully) used to be. Read G. K. Chesterton - 'The Silent People', please. :)
Sp - I have been very 'middle of the road' in voting for 20 years now (I'm glad I didn't vote for Blair.) This is hugely important and cross-party. Don't just rely on the posts on here - have a look at a lot of other (often hidden) news. Economics actually come down on the side of Brexit - after a first shock. I do wish I were cleverer at pasting stuff. Honestly it's not all economics, it's a deeper feeling and understanding that we are US - and we don't want to be told what to do. We want to be free again - as we(successfully) used to be. Read G. K. Chesterton - 'The Silent People', please. :)
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles15 mins ago
Crosswords19 mins ago
Home & Garden25 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles25 mins ago
